It is early days still, and we have to give Pope Francis time before we can really come to a judgement of what his Papacy holds in store for the Church. So far, he reminds me of Pope John XXIII, and Pope John Paul I. He is a breath of fresh air – and I say that without detracting from the very considerable achievements of Pope Benedict. Like everyone else, apart from Mr Thavis, I was surprised by the choice of the Cardinals. My own preference was Cardinal Caffarra, the Archbishop of Bologna. I heard the Cardinal preach when he was Archbishop of Ferrara, and spoke to him; he is both brilliant and affable, but being 74 years old, I was pretty sure far too old to be a successor to Benedict XVI. My eye was also on a younger candidate, Cardinal O’Malley, of Boston: he was an American, whose no nonsense attitude might well shake up the Roman Curia, and a Capuchin: I had a feeling a Franciscan Papacy would be a good thing. As it turned out, we did get a Franciscan Papacy, but not in the way I had imagined. God loves to pull a fast one.

The single biggest thing to watch out for over the coming days and weeks is the appointment of a new Secretary of State. Whoever is appointed will be the second most important person in the Vatican after the Pope, and on his shoulders will rest the mammoth task of guiding the nuncios around the world; without an effective Secretary of Sate, reform of the Curia will be impossible.

Pope John XXIII appointed his Secretary of State on the very night he was elected. But in Cardinal Tardini the Blessed John XXIII had an obvious candidate. In that there is no obvious candidate, it seems right that Pope Francis should pause and ponder; but the longer this pause goes on for, the longer it may seem that the desire to change has run into the sand. But he has to appoint someone sooner or later, given that the current incumbent is in his late seventies. The question is – who?

John Thavis has spotted that Pope Francis speaks Italian to the exclusion of almost everything else. This is deeply significant. It reminds us all that the Pope is first and foremost the Bishop of Rome, and one who told us, at his election, that he sees the evangelisation of the city of Rome as one of his major tasks. That is certainly welcome. There are parts of Rome, the parts where people live and where tourists never go, the periferia, which will remind the Pope of parts of Buenos Aires, and which are almost totally godless. One can expect the Holy Father to start visiting places like Tor Bella Monaca, and soon.

The emphasis on Italian is also music to the ears of Italians. Many a time and oft in the John Paul II era I heard Italians discussing how a future Pope had to be Italian, as he was Bishop of Rome, an Italian city. Never mind the fact that many medieval bishops were born far from their diocese; it is a matter of national pride for Italians that the Pope should be one of them. And this one is: Italo-Argentino, but essentially an Italian son of Italian parents in Italian eyes.

But does the Pope’s perceived Italian identity count in the wider scheme of things? Will it make the reform of the Curia easier? Or will it signal business as usual? Will the ‘Italian way of doing things’ carry on under the Italian-Argentinean Pope?

Beyond this is another question. Can the Roman Curia in fact be reformed? Is it not far too late for that? One remembers the ways in which various ministers of Louis XVI grappled with the question of reform, and failed. The way various Ottoman Sultans tried reform, and failed. And the way the Chinese Emperors also tried to modernise, and failed. But maybe something can be learned from the Chinese and Ottoman experiences.

The Auspicious Incident of 1826 which saw the forcible dissolution of the Janissary Corps may be one pointer. Another may be the stern measure take by Pu Yi in 1924: annoyed by the rampaging theft of the eunuchs in the Forbidden City, he had them all expelled without warning. By then, of course, it was far too late, and the damage had been done. But the principle – that of suppression of a body that proves irreformable – is a good one.

Comments

Comment Policy

At The Catholic Herald we want our articles to provoke spirited and lively debate. We also want to ensure the discussions hosted on our website are carried out in civil terms.

All commenters are therefore politely asked to ensure that their posts respond directly to points raised in the particular article or by fellow contributors, and that all responses are respectful.

Benedict Carter

What would you have in the Curia’s place?

National Bishop’s Conferences, who even JPII and BXVI noted were obstacles to the preaching of the Gospel; haunts of “professional Catholics”, invariably jobs-for-people-like-me liberals; a hiding place for cowards and knaves?

National Bishops’ Conferences which publish bland New Age nonsense, and much worse? What about the notorious Belgian Bishops’ Conference catechism, which even included diagrams to show you how to molest little children? Or the infamous and explicitly heretical catechisms of France and the Netherlands?

No! What we need is a total sweep-out of the sodomite mafia from the Curia, and not just the Curia – from the entire global Episcopate. We need the forcible dissolution of Bishops’ Conferences and the sacking of their entire salaried lay hangers-on. We need a Pope who will appoint HOLY and ORTHODOX Bishops, which was not done either by JPII or by BXVI. We need those cardinals and Bishops who are known to be Freemasons (and Rome knows who they are) to be excommunicated.

Most of all, we need a Pope who dumps the conciliarism of the post-Vatican II Church and RULES as a Pope should. Conciliarism is a form of government that ties one arm behind the Pope’s back which means he can only act if the Bishops agree. As most of the Bishops world-wide these last fifty years have proved themselves for the most part inept shepherds or even wolves, conciliarism has been a policy of absolute disaster in many ways, certainly as far as government is concerned.

The Church has to have the Curia. One cannot operate without it. But its officers must be orthodox first and foremost. This is the crux of the Curial problem: it is riven by factions based on doctrinal grounds. At least one of these factions is inimically hostile to Christianity.

Bro

Mr Carter should go and have a stiff drink or take a Valium. If my mind worked like that I probably would. I disagree with most of what he says but not with the same amount of vitriol.

Benedict Carter

LOL Been teetotal for 30 years Bro.

What do you disagree with, and why? What’s your solution to Vatileaks etc?

http://www.catholicyouthwork.com Catholic Youth Work

Actually, the only correct response to a post like that is ‘ooooookay… moving on…’

http://www.catholicyouthwork.com Catholic Youth Work

Great article, thanks Father. Such a strong start for Pope Francis. I think we are living in exciting times

NatOns

Indeed so Father, yet perhaps not quite as many currently understand the term ‘reform’. What the crumbling Age of Aquarius punters (not least in the hierarchy) seem to require is a form of Kali worship, a self-meditated destruction (of others work) to allow one’s own ‘self’ full ‘liberation’. This, however, is not the reform – not the rebuilding – that the Church Catholic ever needs, requires or thrives on; for it is one body with one Spirit, it lives by being built up in love not self-assertion; so we .. and our beloved Holy Father Pope Francis .. do not need to de-construct and reconstruct the Lord our God (in our own fanciful image of reformation) even in his less glowing ministering members (as some well intentioned but misguided pastors suggest): we need to live by the absolute and inalienable ‘power’ of Christ Jesus, Whose royal and priestly Body we were reborn to form at the Sacrament of Baptism.

“Christians must be the vanguard in showing what a renewed culture of solidarity and responsibility and care for others means, in the face of a culture of widespread individualism.”

“Newness and life will not come out of a Church which still wants to look on itself as an institution of power, even a renewed institution, or from a Church which is simply a focal point of organised doing good or social reform.”

“The Church has to be re-structured and de-structured to allow it to witness to the sense of meaning and purpose that Jesus brings to the lives of believers.”

The Vatican curia that assists the Bishop of Rome to be a nurturing father in the gospel to all the sheep of Christ – not least his little sheep – must accept a new heart: Christ’s. Its present and future Cardinal ministers do need to be formed in the light of their title, as hinges: upon which the Peterine witness to Christ can still turn out toward to all creation; and thus reformed in spirit and matter, form and effect to help fulfil (not stymie) their call. Sadly, the material from which this assembled court held in council is made has also to be mindful of being of the flesh fleshy, or it will not be able to be wiser than the serpent – even as it helps feed the lambs set among wolves; this brings us to the often confused .. and gravely confusing .. mindset of all too many pastors set to rule in honour for the good of souls (the very pastors upon whom fidelity to Peter’s witness at Rome may have to rely).

“We have to defend the right to life and we must at the same time always accompany that defence with a commitment to ensure that all can live their lives with a level of dignity worthy of the Lord of life in whose image they have been created.”

“In the resurrection of Jesus that liberation reaches a climax; all creation rejoices since sin and death, which most profoundly entrap and imprison us, are overcome in a definitive way through the self-giving sacrifice of Jesus Christ.”

Diarmuid Martin, Archbishop of Dublin, Easter Vigil Homily 2013 CE.

Archbishop Martin of Dublin is by no means the worst of specimens, in fact he is a genuinely loving, concerned and devoted servant to the people of Ireland. Nonetheless, his whole ‘spirit’ seems to be that of Palladius before the rulers of Ireland, and it is all too typical (with all but all of the Irish hierarchy); kindly, well-intentioned, but fundamentally vacuous. True, if one hears his Easter message with an understanding heart it does glow with a radiant love of the Lord .. and seeks to enliven this love in the minds and hearts and souls of his starving flock; still, at its base, it is an appeal that falls on deaf ears and hardened hearts .. because it is not true to One it is intended to witness; this can never be said of Patrick or his followers .. and it is a Patrick that Ireland (and the whole world) requires (not a tribe of Palladii) .. one who sincerely loves, but who will unflinchingly confront worldly ambitions (no matter how much these appeal to the fleshly ‘now’), one who leads from the front .. ready to take the blows (yet never elevating himself above the body he represents in power: Christ’s).

PS: Apologies to Archbishop Martin if this hurts, it is not intended to sting – only to illustrate.

NatOns

Episcopal synods – even at Rome – are not lacking in Sacred Tradition, of course. And, sadly, I agree, BC, it is the ‘spirit’ sic of all to many National Conferences to abandon conciliar purpose (to address needs, oppose error, agree actions – by affirming Sacred Tradition) and have replaced it instead with mere Business Management. The court that Peter’s witness from Rome requires is not a business, nor a cabinet, rather a service – upon which the pope’s ministry to the whole Church hinges; far too few – even in the Curia (or on the Chair of Peter) -.seem to grasp why ‘The Church has to have the Curia’ .. and it cannot be ‘reformed’ to function well (or as well as any men can deliver) without that basic understanding!

http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

Good post, and I agree with most of it.

YES, the entirety of the actively homosexual clergy needs to be expelled, either into positions of simple micro-management if they should have any skill at such things, or out of the clergy in nearly every other case, but CERTAINLY out of ANY position whereby they might have ANY say at all in the pastoral or doctrinal transmission of Catholic teaching and practice towards the Faithful, nor the selection of candidates for the diaconate nor priesthood nor episcopal nor any other change of clerical state.

The Bishops Conferences though are probably a better idea, at heart, than in their current (at best : confused, and confusing) incarnation.

Conciliarism isn’t really “a form of government” though — it’s a formal heresy of doctrinal interpretation, so technically a form of heterodoxy. Were you thinking of Collegiality ?

The issue that I’d personally have with the Bishops Conferences, in their present form, is that too many Bishops can imagine that they need to be obedient to these particular, national Conferences — whilst forgetting (sometimes, as a handy personal convenience) the obligations of their own personal sovereignty, as well as their Community with the entirety of the College of Bishops, and with their Prefect in Rome as well as with all the other Offices and Prefects of the Curia — and by this forgetfulness, creating the conditions of a possible zone of resistance to the Sovereignty of the Holy Roman Pontiff, and that of the Universal Church as a whole ; that the Pope represents towards the Faithful, in his own person.

The Sovereignty of the Pope and the Sovereignty of the Universal Church are One — in Holy Eucharistic Communion through the Flesh and the Blood — and every Catholic : Lay, Religious, Deacon, Priest, and Bishop ; every Catholic Parish, Diocese, Province, Nation, Region, Organisation, Conference, and Order ; gives its obedience to this singular source of the Catholic Sovereignty, Gifted as it has been to Our Holy Church by the Christ Himself unto Peter, His Apostle.

As such, these Bishops Conferences should not be seen by their membership as any kind of source of Authority in themselves, but rather as being the equivalent of an Episcopal religious Order, whose membership comprised the Bishops of a particular Nation or Region. Obedience, Prayer, and Charity should be their Rule ; not Governance and Authority.

Governance and Authority are provided to each Bishop personally ; NOT collectively — Vatican II itself teaches this fact, most clearly.

Certainly, there are some National or Regional issues that can be handled most effectively by a group of Bishops acting in concert — clearly, this is where the Bishops Conferences can be at their most effective — but when we see such forms of clear mismanagement or pastoral faux pas as have self-evidently been provided for example by the Bishops Conferences of the US, and England & Wales, we can see that it has always been caused by an undue usurpation of the Episcopal Authority that is given through the Holy Father to EACH of their individual member Bishops in PERSON.

There is the further problem, which is perhaps less immediately visible to most Laity, that an excessive submission of a Bishop of his own Episcopal Authority to a collective and its local Leadership can engender a lack of immediate reactivity towards some diocesan or achdiocesan problems, that the Bishop should simply be handling HIMSELF, without first submitting them to such a talking shop ; and thereby, incidentally, clogging up the ongoing affairs of the Bishops Conference in question in a completely counterproductive manner.

Then again, we are blessed in our own Diocese, that our Bishop is NOT a member of any Bishops Conference, but is instead directly obedient to the Holy Father. The Faith flourishes under his guidance.

Benedict Carter

Like the Chinese curse?

Benedict Carter

I meant both conciliarist and collegial

Benedict Carter

Why do you say that, CYW? Far too easy just to ignore and not answer.

NYer

I am concerned about this tendency of Pope Francis to see himself almost exclusively as “the bishop of Rome”, with little outreach to the universal aspects of the Church…no greetings in various languages (which appear to be a choice, not just something he will necessarily ease into).
What are the implications of this for the Church and for curial reform? Should I be concerned?

http://www.beachlaw.org/ Kevin Beach

“Whoever is appointed will be the second most important person in the Vatican after the Pope …”

So who is the first most important person after the Pope?

http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

Ben, you missed who he’s responding to — CYW was referring to your post …

Benedict Carter

??? I know. And I am asking him WHY he wants to “move on” without addressing a single point made. It’s very easy to pass by with one’s brain engaged in neutral. So many Catholics cannot think anymore.

Aaron

Hey, some of us only scroll the comments to see what Mr. Carter and a few others have to contribute.

$27740841

How rude you are.

sclerotic

Well, it’s certainly not gorgeous George any more.

Jon Brownridge

“So many Catholics cannot think anymore”.

Since when are Catholics encouraged (allowed?) to think? It’s the ‘no-thinking’ syndrome that allows the majority of Catholics to continue unperturbed in this soul-destroying culture of magic and make believe that you seem to espouse. I am always impressed by your background knowledge and your skill in expressing it, but your potential for doing some good with it is, it seems to me, sadly wasted. Follow this Popes’ lead – He is surely on the right track.

Shaun

I think part of this is simply that he was chosen so shortly before Holy Week. He won’t have had much time to digest the Vatileaks report, think about Curial reform or have practiced speaking in other languages he’s not used for a while because I imagine it’s the busiest time of year for any priest, but especially the Pope.

‘This is the crux of the Curial problem: it is riven by factions based on doctrinal grounds. At least one of these factions is inimically hostile to Christianity.’

But isn’t the real problem that the Curia seems to be riven by factions that aren’t based on doctrinal grounds? It’s just as riven by factions based in the Italian Church and on patronage as anything else.

Katalina

I don’t really think he is a “breath of fresh air” at all. He has a media created personality cult just like John XXIII and John Paul II but eventually the balloon will burst and people will be upset that he really did not meet their expectations. I think a younger and healthier man should have been elected like Raymond “Leo” Burke who has Canon Law on his side and mind.

Benedict Carter

Yes, that’s right. The fault lines run in different directions.

Simon James Perry

Well, getting rid of homosexual clergy is all very well but as they seem to predominate in the clerical caste I doubt in reality much will be done about it. I used to think 50percent of priests were homosexual in orientation, now i’m inclined to think the number could be quite a lot higher than that, and in some religious orders almost exclusively so.
Obviously having practicing homosexual clergy is quite ridiculous, but even such a high percentage in orientation is not acceptable.
I’ve had it with a clerical establishment which speaks of homosexuality as a disorder when the scientific evidence is really not there to confirm this (notice the homsexual lobby pretend science supports the idea that homosexuality is utterly natural, this is quite loopy too)
How can anyone trust an effete clerical establishment which says homosexuals should not be ordained (even if just oriented in this way) when it knows full well the church is full of them. And on the other hand say that that only celibates should be ordained (apart from certain exceptions)
I would suggest one of the reasons the clerical establishment goes on about homosexuality as some sort of disorder (ssa or whatever silly pseudo scientific sounding name they wish to use) is because many of them would like to believe one day they will be cured themselves.
Furthermore i’m quite sick of traditionalist types moaning about homosexuality as though it only applies to the nasty modernist church. I don’t believe this for one moment and know full well that the trads have their fair share of homosexuals in the clergy. It’s glaringly obvious even to many trads. I can think of many trad friends who fall into the homosexual category.
What does it mean to be a practicing homosexual anyway: at it full time, once a month, every now and then when the temptation ocurrs? The ones with boyfriends are easier to spot than the ones at it now and again. Who’s is going to find out, if they do it in their own little circle. No one will tell on the other for fear of being found out themselves.

http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

Since when are Catholics encouraged … to think?

Since Christ first made His Sermons, Master Trollbridge.

http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

I used to think 50percent of priests were homosexual in orientation, now
i’m inclined to think the number could be quite a lot higher than
that, and in some religious orders almost exclusively so

There is a great deal of local (often National) variation in such matters, insofar as I understand them, as a non-homosexual non-clergyman.

As such, reactions and conclusions such as your own are quite understandable…

LocutusOP

Like Benedict Carter, I can’t see much of an option to the Roman Curia. The problem is that the appointments are have not been unashamedly Catholic and evangelical in purpose.

As for Pope Francis, franky, I don’t think he can be bothered with reforming/restoring/transforming the curia. I don’t see him as someone who is keen to get his mind into details, and sadly I think this is why he might have been elected – by people who wanted to protect their cosy interests.

I hope I’m wrong on at least that last bit.

Angela

From what I have come to understand, the curia HAS to be reformed. First of all, the pope MUST be able to trust people in the curia.
Secondly, the homosexuality within the priesthood AND the curia must be addressed. It is deeply disturbing, although most catholics shrink from saying this openly. Bill Donahue, America, is a refreshing exception, also very trustworthy. As Benedict XVI said, not ling after his election, in 2005, “IT CANNOT BE THAT PEOPLE WILL COME TO UNDERSTAND THE PRIESTHOOD AS SYNONYMOUS WITH HOMOSEXUALITY”.
I don’t see that quotation in any of the media.
To me, a convert to the glorious church, it was an incredibe shock to realize how wide spread homosexuality was in the church- even among bishops and cardinals.
Angela

AlanP

If my mind worked like that I would look around for a Church which was a little more amenable to my way of thinking, one with a hierarchy I approved of. SSPX comes to mind (not strictly a Church, I know). But BC must make his own choices.

AlanP

Gorgeous George? What has the Respect MP for Bradford got to do with it?

$24570317

“Obviously having practicing homosexual clergy is quite ridiculous”

Well it’s certainly present. And also (increasingly so) in the seminaries.
Those who are “practicing homosexuals” can totally justify it within their view of correct Catholic teaching.

$24570317

If I were Francis 1 I would do a Ronald Regan and sack the lot – but allow some to re-apply for their former positions.

Benedict Carter

If “increasingly so” in the seminaries, it can only be because BXVI’s instruction to exclude them from priestly formation has been deliberately ignored.

Your evidence?

Benedict Carter

I am a Catholic and want to remain one. The tension Alan is caused by the fact that the mainstream Church has gone protestant.

http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

It is mortally sinful to preach that vices are virtues.

The number of GROSS errors of fact, teaching, and understanding committed in the first five minutes is extremely shocking.

The production and transmission of that video was very likely a grave mortal sin by those who worked on it.

AlanP

You seem to be saying that you are a Catholic, but the Church you belong to is not.

LocutusOP

Barely qualifies for the laity as well.

AlanP

I don’t think accusations of active homosexuality among the hierarchy should be flung around without sound evidence. I’ve heard these rumours of a “gay mafia” etc., but without clear evidence I’ve assumed most of it is the usual journalistic smears. Besides which, we are all sinners, and should always be willing to forgive.

Benedict Carter

Read “Goodbye Good Men” and “The Rite of Sodomy” and you will learn more than you dreamed of.

Benedict Carter

The “anti-Church” that envelops at the moment most of the Church that Christ founded (which will remain forever), rendering it almost invisible, is not Catholic, no, it is not.

James M

But what does “evangelical” mean ? I have no hopes of this Pope – STM you may well be right. I think – on the evidence so far available – that he’s a strong-minded miserabilist who mistakes wrecking the Church’s Traditions & Liturgy for reform. IOW, he’s making some of the same mistakes as were made after V2.

James M

“It’s the ‘no-thinking’ syndrome that allows the majority of Catholics to continue unperturbed…”

## That much I agree with. But as for “…this soul-destroying culture of magic and make believe…” – I have no idea what that refers to.

James M

The Church is like a drunkard: her identity is unchanged, but her behaviour is often inconsistent with herself. In the meantime, Catholics should continue with being Catholic, even if this upsets the CC in her present unhealthy state, because she is founded to be Catholic, not to be drunk. To join in the current alcoholic stupor on the pretext of obedience would be daft, and in opposition to the Church as she is when sober.

Thomas Poovathinkal SSP

“This is deeply significant. It reminds us all that the Pope is first and
foremost the Bishop of Rome, and one who told us, at his election, that
he sees the evangelisation of the city of Rome as one of his major
tasks.”

Actually, my definition of evangelical is pretty straightforward and orthodox. Pope Benedict mentioned in one of his books (“Light of the word”, I think, although it might have been “Pilgrim fellowship of faith”) that the opposite of “conservative” in the Christian sense is not ‘liberal’ but “evangelical”.

When I write evangelical I simply mean people who are not afraid to preach the Gospel as if it is the good news that it realy is – regardless of how popular that might get them. I mean people who will provide the hope from darkness that an authentic Christian message can do – what we used to call Catholicism.

We need to tell people what the Gospel offers – that it is essentially a love story between mankind and God, and not just a list of do’s and donts, but at the same time stress that one cannot have it both ways. To be in favour of something means to be against its opposite, and this must be done in a way which leaves no room for ambiguity – no tip-toeing around difficult issues.

cjkeeffe

In what objective way is teh Roman Curia defective? The call to reform the curia was on the lips of all during teh recent conclave.
The way to get teh gospel message out is to sack all teh so called liturgy experts employed in local curia and abolish the bishops conferences which may local bishops departmental managers and not shepherds of the flock.

Dr Falk

Dear Benedict,

You seem too see the whole Church in error apart from a certain remnant of faithful Catholics. Is that your position?

Dr Falk

So how do we work out what is the true identity if voices at the present are incoherent because of alcohol? Also if we turn to documents of the past how do we know their voices weren’t influenced by the bottle too?

http://www.catholicyouthwork.com Catholic Youth Work

Nope. Responding to bro

Tridentinus

The Curia will manage the Pope as they have done for 50 or sixty years or so. The last Pope, the much maligned Pius XII was his own Secretary of State for much of his Pontificate thus consolidating both spiritual and temporal power in his own person.